Embracing Duality: How Behavioral Data Helps Leaders Transform Both/And Thinking into Performance Drivers
Executive Summary:
In today's complex and rapidly evolving business landscape, leaders face an unprecedented challenge: navigating persistent seemingly contradictory demands while driving organizational performance. This white paper explores how leveraging behavioral data, particularly through tools like the Harrison Assessment, can empower leaders to embrace duality and transform paradoxes into powerful performance drivers. By adopting a "Both/And" thinking approach, leaders can help create mindsets and new insights within their organizations, fostering innovation, adaptability, and sustained success.
Introduction:
Organizations and markets are full of paradoxes. Leaders are expected to be visionary yet pragmatic, decisive yet collaborative, risk-taking yet prudent, candid but tactful, analytical yet intuitive... Traditionally, these opposing forces have been viewed as dilemmas requiring trade-offs. However, recent research and advanced behavioral assessment tools are revealing a new paradigm: the ability to embrace these dualities can be a significant source of competitive advantage.
Paradoxes are the most common terminology used but they are also used for similar but somewhat different concepts than we address here. Others refer to these as dialectics, polarities, contradictory dilemmas… The extra baggage several of these carry has lead us to develop our own term to make these concepts clearer. We call them PICT’s, an acronym for Persistent Interdependent Contradictory Tensions. We think you’ll find it more effective to deploy the PICT concept in your organization.
Attributes of PICT’s include:
Persistent refers to the enduring nature of competing demands or contradictory elements in an organization, community, system…. These tensions do not disappear but remain relevant and present over extended periods, often throughout an organization's lifecycle. They tend to resurface repeatedly, even if temporarily resolved and are indeed, inherent to the system (organization, interpersonal dynamic, community…)
Example: The tension between exploration (seeking new opportunities) and exploitation (optimizing existing processes) is a persistent paradox in many organizations. It doesn't go away as the company grows or evolves; instead, leaders must continuously balance these competing needs.
Interdependent describes the intricate relationship between seemingly opposing elements, where each side relies on or is defined by the other. This concept emphasizes that contradictory aspects are not truly separate but are interconnected parts of a larger system. Each side of the paradox depends on the other for its existence or full expression - a concept called mutual reliance. The interdependent elements may enhance each other when properly balanced and sufficiently prominent so they are symbiotic. Understanding interdependence requires looking at the organization as a whole system rather than isolated parts and the relationship between interdependent elements is fluid, changing over time.
Example: The paradox of stability and change in organizations is interdependent. An organization needs stability to implement changes effectively, while the ability to change helps maintain long-term stability. Neither can exist optimally without the other.
Contradictory refers to elements, demands, behaviors or goals that appear to be logically inconsistent or mutually exclusive at first glance. These opposing forces seem to pull the organization or its leaders in different directions simultaneously. The contradictory elements seem to be incompatible and at odds with each other on the surface. Also, dealing with contradictory demands often creates tension or discomfort for individuals and organizations and usually presents a true challenge to traditional either/or thinking. Finally the tension created by contradictory elements can spark innovation and creative approaches.
Example: The need for both individual accountability and teamwork in organizations is contradictory. Leaders must foster a sense of personal responsibility while also encouraging collaborative efforts and shared goals.
Tensions refer to the stresses, and pressures that arise from the coexistence of contradictory demands or elements. These tensions are the felt experience of dealing with the contradictory choices and can manifest at individual, team, and organizational levels. Tensions can create stress, anxiety, or discomfort for individuals facing paradoxical demands AND as well, while potentially challenging, tensions can also be a source of energy, driving change and innovation. The strength of tensions however, can fluctuate over time and in different contexts. Also, tensions can be cognitive (conflicting ideas), emotional (conflicting feelings), or behavioral (conflicting actions). The presence of persistent tensions often what signals an underlying paradox needing attention.
In addition, one tension in the PICT tends to be supporting the effectiveness of the other while the other is the action-oriented dynamic tension.
Example: A CEO might experience tension when trying to maintain short-term profitability (action now) while also investing in long-term innovation (supporting) or telling the story directly (action) AND saying it tactfully for a positive response (supporting). This tension might manifest as stress when making budget decisions or when communicating with stakeholders with different time horizons.
This white paper delves into how leaders can harness behavioral data to navigate these paradoxes effectively, turning potential conflicts into synergies that drive performance across individual, team, and organizational levels.
The Power of PICTs in Leadership
Understanding PICTs in Business
Paradoxes in business are seemingly contradictory demands that coexist and persist over time. Examples include:
Exploration vs. Exploitation
Centralization vs. Decentralization
Stability vs. Change
Developing Capability vs. Executing Capably
Collaboration vs. Competition
Historically, leaders have often approached these as "either/or" choices, leading to suboptimal outcomes and missed opportunities.
The Shift to "Both/And" Thinking
Recent research, notably highlighted in the 2022 book "Both/And Thinking" by Wendy Smith and Marianne Lewis, proposes a paradigm shift. Instead of viewing paradoxes as problems to be solved, they can be seen as opportunities for creative tension and innovation.
"Both/And" thinking encourages leaders to:
Embrace complexity rather than seek simplification
See paradoxes as interconnected rather than separate
Seek creative solutions that address multiple demands simultaneously
The Role of Behavioral Data in Navigating Paradoxes
The Harrison Assessment: A Tool for Paradox Navigation
The Harrison Assessment is a powerful tool that provides deep insights into an individual's behavioral tendencies, preferences, and paradox navigation abilities. It offers several key advantages for business leaders looking to shift to more effective mindsets with more both/and thinking.
Paradox Graph: The assessment includes a unique Paradox Graph that visualizes how an individual attempts to balance seemingly opposing traits. Understanding the data represented in the Paradox Graph improves self awareness, team awareness personal effectiveness and leadership capability. By understanding ones natural tendencies including areas of strength and psychological flexibility and areas of challenge including areas of psychological rigidity, there are several pronounced and powerful benefits
Self awareness of key strengths and flexibilities to feature in your interactions, judgments, decisions and communications.
Self-awareness of your rigidities and weaknesses so you can steer yourself to using your strengths instead or if not possible, work on development to minimize or eliminate the weakness.
Build Complementary Teams: By assembling teams with diverse paradox navigation abilities, leaders can ensure that their organization is equipped to handle a wide range of complex challenges. By sharing key information with team leaders, you can increase team engagement and minimize unproductive conflict that comes from misunderstanding behaviors and tendencies.
Develop Targeted Interventions: Behavioral data can guide the development of specific strategies and interventions to improve paradox navigation skills across the organization and also address stress which has a major negative impact on how paradoxes are navigated.
Foster a Culture of Both/And: Leaders can use these insights to model and encourage "Both/And" thinking throughout their organizations, creating a culture that thrives on embracing PICTs.
Traits and Preferences: By mapping out an individual's traits and preferences, the Harrison Assessment allows leaders to identify potential blind spots and areas where they might naturally lean towards one side of a paradox.
Transforming Paradoxes into Performance Drivers
Strategies for Leveraging Paradoxes
Cognitive Reframing: Train leaders to reframe paradoxes as opportunities rather than problems. This shift in mindset opens up new possibilities for creative solutions. Working on behavioral paradoxes first helps make this process more tangible and more effective. I
Dynamic Balancing: Develop systems and processes that allow for dynamic shifts between opposing demands as circumstances change. This could involve creating flexible team structures or implementing adaptive decision-making protocols.
Paradox Mindset Development: Use behavioral data to create targeted development programs that enhance leaders' abilities to navigate specific paradoxes and optimize their both/and thinking
Collaborative Problem-Solving: Encourage cross-functional collaboration that brings together individuals with complementary paradox navigation skills to tackle complex challenges.
Metrics and Incentives: Develop performance metrics and incentive structures that reward the successful navigation of paradoxes rather than optimizing for single dimensions.
Implementing a PICT-Embracing Culture
The Leader’s role
As the primary culture setter, the CEO plays a crucial role in embedding a paradox-embracing mindset throughout the organization.
Key actions include:
Modeling "Both/And" Thinking: Consistently demonstrate the ability to hold and act on seemingly contradictory ideas simultaneously.
Communication: Regularly articulate the importance of embracing paradoxes and share success stories that highlight the power of duality.
Resource Allocation: Ensure that resources are allocated in ways that support both short-term performance and long-term adaptability.
Decision-Making Processes: Implement decision-making frameworks that explicitly consider paradoxical demands and seek solutions that address multiple objectives.
Reflection. The reality is that both/and thinking and deploying self and team awareness, does take some reflection.
Embedding Paradox Navigation in HR Processes
One example presented in the Both/And Thinking book is the Lego organization that used paradoxes from the statement of the value to how they conduct key processes to achieve a highly effective turnaround. So, to truly transform paradoxes into performance drivers, organizations need to embed this approach in their core management processes:
Selection: Use behavioral assessments to identify candidates with strong paradox navigation abilities that fit the job, team and culture.
Performance Management: Include paradox navigation as a key competency in performance evaluations.
Leadership Development: Design leadership development programs that explicitly focus on enhancing paradox navigation skills.
Succession Planning: Ensure that the leadership pipeline includes individuals who demonstrate strong "Both/And" thinking capabilities.
Measuring the Impact of PICT Navigation
To demonstrate the value of embracing duality, leaders need to implement robust measurement systems:
Balanced Scorecards: Develop scorecards that track performance across multiple, potentially conflicting dimensions.
Paradox Navigation Metrics: Create specific metrics to assess how well individuals and teams are balancing paradoxical demands.
Long-term Value Creation: Implement measures that capture both short-term performance and indicators of long-term adaptability and innovation potential.
Employee Engagement: Monitor how embracing paradoxes affects employee satisfaction, creativity, and retention.
Conclusion
In an era of unprecedented complexity and change, the ability to navigate paradoxes is becoming a critical leadership skill. By leveraging behavioral data and embracing a "Both/And" mindset, CEOs can transform these seeming contradictions into powerful performance drivers.
The journey to embracing duality is not without challenges. It requires a fundamental shift in thinking, robust tools like the Harrison Assessment, and a commitment to ongoing learning and adaptation. However, the potential rewards – increased innovation, enhanced adaptability, and sustained high performance – make this a journey well worth undertaking.
As we move further into an era defined by volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity, those leaders and organizations that can master the art of paradox navigation will be best positioned to thrive. By embracing duality, CEOs can unlock new levels of individual, team, and organizational performance, setting the stage for enduring success in an ever-changing business landscape.
References
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2022). Both/And Thinking: Embracing Creative Tensions to Solve Your Toughest Problems. Harvard Business Review Press.
Harrison Assessments. (n.d.). Paradox Technology. Retrieved from [Harrison Assessments website]
Zhang, Y., Waldman, D. A., Han, Y. L., & Li, X. B. (2015). Paradoxical leader behaviors in people management: Antecedents and consequences. Academy of Management Journal, 58(2), 538-566.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (2000). Paradox, spirals, ambivalence: The new language of change and pluralism. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 703-705.
Miron-Spektor, E., Ingram, A., Keller, J., Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2018). Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem. Academy of Management Journal, 61(1), 26-45.